This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Encoding (memory) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
"Studies have shown that the intention to learn has no direct effect on memory encoding. Instead, memory encoding is dependent on how deeply each item is encoded, which could be affected by intention to learn, but not exclusively. That is, intention to learn can lead to more effective learning strategies, and consequently, better memory encoding, but if you learn something incidentally (i.e. without intention to learn) but still process and learn the information effectively, it will get encoded just as well as something learnt with intention.[21]"
This paragraph contradicts itself. It states unequivocally that intention does not effect encoding ("deep" processing does) and then says that intention could affect encoding. Either intention does or doesn't, we really can't have it both ways. I also suggest that encoding should not be associated "learning strategies" as the latter are conscious, language based, encoded information (i.e., memory content); not a process that controls memory content like encoding. Whether learning strategies for learning actually affects encoding seems very unlikely as encoding is a very low level biologically-based cognitive ability. If learning strategies improve learning (which is debatable at best), improvement is for reasons other than improvements in encoding, so mentioning the two as related is confusing and best, and likely just wrong. Most of what we learn is "incidental" (which I would not equate with non-intentional) and depends on how and how much incoming information is processed, not "intent" however defined. My suggest is to delete the text under ths this heading after the second sentence. --- Rob C — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.243.176.158 (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
